Steven Baker found guilty

[JeffDunne]

They accepted that Baker initiated contact, off the ball, which resulted in Farmer being carried from the ground with concussion and a broken nose and unable to play any further part in the game.

He hasn't got a broken nose and he was concussed from an accidental head clash.

Unless you can prove that Baker could forsee that eventuating from his actions, then you can't seriously argue that he ignored his duty of care. Unless you can also prove that Farmer didn't change direction then you can't even argue that Baker was solely responsible for the contact.

Players make contact all the time off the ball, 100's of times in every game. Unless you are going to ban all contact then you can't possibly argue that by initiating contact you are ignoring your duty of care.

What next, reporting players for dropping into the hole because they should be able to forsee a clash of bodies (which is their intention)?

 

[Big Cox]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

True, he'd be too busy following the battle betwen Culkin and Coleman.

GOLD!!!!

 

[MRobbo]

Relax JeffDunne, what happened Tuesday night is finished with.

St Kilda don't have any new evidence end of story. Appeal will be dismissed.

 

[greennick]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

An interesting question raised by a caller on SEN asking what have happened if an umpire was in the place of Baker and the same incident occurred ?. ie. no vision and Jeff ending up with facial injuries.

Would Farmer have been given a holiday regardless of injuries sustained ?.

Not a Baker defence, I just find it a fascinating question/hypothetical given the lack of vision of the incident.

The real question is, what would have happened if Farmer was an umpire?

Given they were 30-50m off the ball, Baker has as much right to shepherd an umpire as he does Farmer.

Baker would have gotten suspended for all of next season. So, you should be happy that Farmer is not an umpire and Baker gets to play at some stage next year.

 

[JeffDunne]

I'm sure the fact Im coming from a neutral perspective and your not might have something to do with.

LOL

Do you think I just joined Bigfooty yesterday?

You are one of the worst St Kilda trolls on this forum.

 

[Big Cox]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

The real question is, what would have happened if Farmer was an umpire?

Given they were 30-50m off the ball, Baker has as much right to shepherd an umpire as he does Farmer.

Baker would have gotten suspended for all of next season. So, you should be happy that Farmer is not an umpire and Baker gets to play at some stage next year.

Your going off topic. Back to Gary Coleman please or ill have to report your post

 

[JeffDunne]

St Kilda don't have any new evidence end of story. Appeal will be dismissed.

How on earth do you know what St Kilda have to present?

Anyhow, new evidence is not the only basis for an appeal.

 

[understudy]

You are one of the worst St Kilda trolls on this forum.

News to me, I often disagree with you Ill give you that but very rarely comment on anything St Kilda.

 

[tsf]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

Your going off topic. Back to Gary Coleman please or ill have to report your post

If Willis was at the ground and he noticed something untowards happen would Willis be allowed to give evidence ' a la Ricky Nixon'? or would his devious drug taking past count against him as a reliable witness?

 

[Stronzo]

Jeffedunne: Bigfooty totem tennis ball

 

[MRobbo]

How on earth do you know what St Kilda have to present?

Anyhow, new evidence is not the only basis for an appeal.

I am sorry but you can not just appeal because you think the tribunal got it wrong.

St Kilda just getting desperate because they need him. As I said before tonight is a waste of time for the appeals board and St Kilda wasting $5000.

 

[Big Cox]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

If Willis was at the ground and he noticed something untowards happen would Willis be allowed to give evidence ' a la Ricky Nixon'? or would his devious drug taking past count against him as a reliable witness?

Id say the fact Coleman is a ugly little midget who cant see past a seat never mind a person in front of him would count against him giving evidence. Willis wouldnt know what hes talking about so he doesnt count as a witness. Id trust Macauly Culkin though. Given his prowess in stopping crimninal masterminds with marbles and paint he does have a good eye for detail. Very trustworthy bloke

 

[Waverley73]

Jeffedunne: Bigfooty totem tennis ball

Nice one. He/she just keeps going and going and going and going over the same stuff all day (well a couple of days now).

It's kinda like Groundhog Day but more like Groundhog Post. Keep posting the same thing over and over again and see if the outcome changes.

 

[Chopsticks]

How on earth do you know what St Kilda have to present?

Its the vibe.

 

[Hawk-in-syd]

Read my post again. I said they were instructed and there's only one person in the room that can give them instrustion.

Think hard and I'm sure you can join the dots.


Say the Freagle interested enough to give a shit what happens. Clearly Freo fans have a vested interest in the decision, you're all about to jump ship as you usually do this time of year.

As for the rest of your bile, gradings are everything in determining the penalty and how in god's name could St Kilda have possibly known something that was yet to be determined.

Unlike Frematle, we don't have a line into the (W)AFL giving us what their pre-determined position will be.

Come on JD how about you focus your anger at the real culprits in this. Baker, the STKILDA FC and the idoit QC they have representing them. The only way he was ever going to be found guilty with no video and poor witnesses was if he admitted to initiating the contact. Which the Stkilda QC advised him to do. Once he did that he had responsibility (duty of care) not to hit farmer high which obviously did happen.

If I was a saints fan i would be so angry at the club for the incompentent way they have managed this case, not the purple rabble.

If your QC had advised baker:
a. to say nothing
b. say I was watching the ball
c. cant remember (look I have a bump on my head must have concussion)
d. he must have ran into me
all of the above and he would have got off because there was not enough evidence.

One thing I will say is that if it was a WCE player he would have got off not because of bias because they are far better at defending their players. The saints stuffed it and they are wasting another 5k just so they can say to the fans we tried our best.

 

[Qsaint]

Come on JD how about you focus your anger at the real culprits in this. Baker, the STKILDA FC and the idoit QC they have representing them. The only way he was ever going to be found guilty with no video and poor witnesses was if he admitted to initiating the contact. Which the Stkilda QC advised him to do. Once he did that he had responsibility (duty of care) not to hit farmer high which obviously did happen.

If I was a saints fan i would be so angry at the club for the incompentent way they have managed this case, not the purple rabble.

If your QC had advised baker:
a. to say nothing
b. say I was watching the ball
c. cant remember (look I have a bump on my head must have concussion)
d. he must have ran into me
all of the above and he would have got off because there was not enough evidence.

One thing I will say is that if it was a WCE player he would have got off not because of bias because they are far better at defending their players. The saints stuffed it and they are wasting another 5k just so they can say to the fans we tried our best.

What?

Timeline of events

1 Baker gets referred to the tribunal does not know the charge or the Penalty

2 Gets to the Tribunal

3 Docker Runner Baker ran from a along distance away and elbow farmer in the Head

Now if baker does not say anything what happens???

 

[worthy]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

What if Baker was a girl? Would Farmer have smacked her one?

 

[Kram]

Jeffedunne: Bigfooty totem tennis ball

LOL


You can lead a challenged horse to water, but you can't make it drink . .

 

[Kram]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

The umpire would be sacked and possibly charged with assault.
It's a big no no for umpires to go around dishing out sly bumps 100m away from play.

And there wouldn't be a single person sticking up for him either. SEN and Big Footy would still go into meltdown, but instead of defending him and bagging the AFL, people would be calling for the reintroduction of the death penalty.

The double standards of ST KILDA footy fans never ceases to amaze me.

Edited for accuracy.

 

[tsf]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

Id say the fact Coleman is a ugly little midget who cant see past a seat never mind a person in front of him would count against him giving evidence. Willis wouldnt know what hes talking about so he doesnt count as a witness. Id trust Macauly Culkin though. Given his prowess in stopping crimninal masterminds with marbles and paint he does have a good eye for detail. Very trustworthy bloke

Valid point however I must disagree with the Coleman ugly opinion. If you look at the previous photo in the previous page you'll see he is quite lovable.
That I think would count for him at the tribunal. You can't say he is ugly as he is a midget as that is discrimination and discrimination would get yourself in front of the tribunal.

True about Willis, he couldnt be taken seriously and Kimberley's dead so she'd be no good.

 

[Waverley73]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

I declare that if this picture doesn't make you laugh by just looking at it you're just not human.

Another hypothetical: What if Baker decided a few years back that he'd rather be a rooster impersonator than an AFL player? Would put his puffy chest to great use..

 

[Big Cox]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

Valid point however I must disagree with the Coleman ugly opinion. If you look at the previous photo in the previous page you'll see he is quite lovable.
That I think would count for him at the tribunal. You can't say he is ugly as he is a midget as that is discrimination and discrimination would get yourself in front of the tribunal.

True about Willis, he couldnt be taken seriously and Kimberley's dead so she'd be no good.

Hes ugly nowadays. Back then he was a hunk I agree with that.

 

[Hawk-in-syd]

What?

Timeline of events

1 Baker gets referred to the tribunal does not know the charge or the Penalty

2 Gets to the Tribunal

3 Docker Runner Baker ran from a along distance away and elbow farmer in the Head

Now if baker does not say anything what happens???

Well point 3 the trainer didn't say elbow to the head he said he couldn't see the point of contact because he had his back to him. It was something like contact was between hip and shoulder. Conflicting evidence from nixon and he gets off. Simple.
As I said Baker put himself in it buy admitting to blocking farmer resulting in his head injuries

As I've said earlier I don't agree with the new duty of care rubbish (bought in to look after the like of Kossi) but its the rules, has been all year and everyone especially your QC should have known.

 

[tsf]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

Hes ugly nowadays. Back then he was a hunk I agree with that.

So you're saying hypothetically if Gary Coleman took out Baker behind the play 10 years ago and nobody he might get off 'cause of his good looks?

Interesting theory.

 

[Chopsticks]

Re: What if Baker was an umpire ?

So you're saying hypothetically if Gary Coleman took out Baker behind the play 10 years ago and nobody he might get off 'cause of his good looks?

Interesting theory.

Either his good looks or by using Mr Drummond's truckloads of $$$.